I was just thinking about this … somebody told me yesterday about a newspaper that spent $20,000 to train about six reporters to become “multimedia storytellers,” meaning they can now get some audio, some pictures and some words and make a slick Flash presentation (at least, we hope it’s slick).
Here’s the thing, building a good Flash story takes hours and hours (depending on the story and the content assets), and has probably less than a 20 percent chance of being a hit with the audience. Whereas a quick video can take very little time to edit, and stands about the same chance of being a hit with the audience.
For $20,000 you could buy more than 50 of these (plus memory cards and carrying cases). In a mid-size newsroom, that it is enough to give one to every reporter, and have 20 or 30 left over to hand out to potential citizen journalists in the community.
That strikes me as a much, much higher ROI.
Not to mention that you’re going to have to buy hardware (visual and audio) for your Flash reporters, anyway.
There can be a time and a place for Flash storytelling, but for the most part, video is a better bet.
[tags]newspapers, video, multimedia, flash[/tags]